We are proudly a Ukrainian website. Our country was attacked by Russian Armed Forces on Feb. 24, 2022.
You can support the Ukrainian Army by following the link: https://u24.gov.ua/.
Even the smallest donation is hugely appreciated!
Cita una fonte nei formati APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard e in molti altri stili
Consulta la lista di attuali articoli, libri, tesi, atti di convegni e altre fonti scientifiche attinenti al tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History".
Accanto a ogni fonte nell'elenco di riferimenti c'è un pulsante "Aggiungi alla bibliografia". Premilo e genereremo automaticamente la citazione bibliografica dell'opera scelta nello stile citazionale di cui hai bisogno: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver ecc.
Puoi anche scaricare il testo completo della pubblicazione scientifica nel formato .pdf e leggere online l'abstract (il sommario) dell'opera se è presente nei metadati.
Articoli di riviste sul tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History":
1
Forsyth, Hannah. "Post-war political economics and the growth of Australian university research, c.1945-1965". History of Education Review 46, n. 1 (5 giugno 2017): 15–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/her-10-2015-0023.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider the national and international political-economic environment in which Australian university research grew. It considers the implications of the growing significance of knowledge to the government and capital, looking past institutional developments to also historicise the systems that fed and were fed by the universities. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on the extensive archival research in the National Archives of Australia and the Australian War Memorial on the formation and funding of a wide range of research programmes in the immediate post-war period after the Second World War. These include the Australian Atomic Energy Commission, the NHMRC, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, the Australian Pacific Territories Research Council, the Commonwealth Office of Education, the Universities Commission and the Murray review. This research was conducted under the Margaret George Award for emerging scholars for a project entitled “Knowledge, Nation and Democracy in Post-War Australia”. Findings After the Second World War, the Australian Government invested heavily in research: funding that continued to expand in subsequent decades. In the USA, similar government expenditure affected the trajectory of capitalist democracy for the remainder of the twentieth century, leading to a “military-industrial complex”. The outcome in Australia looked quite different, though still connected to the structure and character of Australian political economics. Originality/value The discussion of the spectacular growth of universities after the Second World War ordinarily rests on the growth in enrolments. This paper draws on a very large literature review as well as primary research to offer new insights into the connections between research and post-war political and economic development, which also explain university growth.
2
Cantelon, Philip L., Glenn T. Seaborg e Benjamin S. Loeb. "The Atomic Energy Commission under Nixon: Adjusting to Troubled Times." Journal of American History 81, n. 2 (settembre 1994): 825. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2081413.
Mazuzan, George T., Glenn T. Seaborg e Benjamin S. Loeb. "The Atomic Energy Commission under Nixon: Adjusting to Troubled Times". Technology and Culture 35, n. 1 (gennaio 1994): 217. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3106778.
Rothschild, Rachel. "Environmental Awareness in the Atomic Age". Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences 43, n. 4 (novembre 2012): 492–530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2013.43.4.492.
The U.S. military first sponsored ecological research during World War II to monitor the release of radioactive effluent into waterways from plutonium production. The Atomic Energy Commission later expanded these investigations to include studies of radioactive fallout at the Nevada and Marshall Island test sites, particularly after the Fukuryu Maru (Lucky Dragon) accident in 1954. The public outcry against nuclear testing from this accident, which contaminated nearby inhabited islands with radioactive fallout, resulted in a considerable influx of funding for environmental science at the Atomic Energy Commission. Many biologists who conducted these studies on nuclear fallout and waste for the Atomic Energy Commission began to develop concerns about radioactive pollution in the environment from the long-term, cumulative effects of nuclear waste disposal, the use of atomic bombs for construction projects, and the potential ecological devastation wrought by nuclear war. Their new environmental awareness prompted many Atomic Energy Commission ecologists to try to draw congressional attention to the dangers that nuclear technology posed to the environment. It also spurred reforms in the education and training of ecologists to meet the challenges of the atomic age through the new subfield of “radioecology” as well as research into problems of environmental pollution more broadly.
5
Hacker, Barton C., Richard G. Hewlett e Jack M. Holl. "Atoms for Peace and War 1953-1961: Eisenhower and the Atomic Energy Commission". Technology and Culture 32, n. 2 (aprile 1991): 450. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3105751.
Winkler, Allan M., Richard G. Hewlett, Jack M. Holl, Richard S. Kirkendall e Roger M. Anders. "Atoms for Peace and War, 1953-1961: Eisenhower and the Atomic Energy Commission." American Historical Review 96, n. 4 (ottobre 1991): 1324. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2165253.
Walker, J. Samuel. "Nuclear Power and the Environment: The Atomic Energy Commission and Thermal Pollution, 1965-1971". Technology and Culture 30, n. 4 (ottobre 1989): 964. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3106199.
Herken, Gregg, e Barton C. Hacker. "Elements of Controversy: The Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation Safety in Nuclear Weapons Testing, 1947-1974." Journal of American History 82, n. 2 (settembre 1995): 820. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2082372.
Cittadino, Eugene. "Barry Commoner and Paul Sears on Project Chariot: Epiphany, Ecology, and the Atomic Energy Commission". Isis 109, n. 4 (2 dicembre 2018): 720–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/701650.
Holl, Jack M., e Barton C. Hacker. "Elements of Controversy: The Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation Safety in Nuclear Weapons Testing, 1947-1974." American Historical Review 101, n. 3 (giugno 1996): 933. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2169599.
Tesi sul tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History":
1
Binnie, Anna-Eugenia. "From atomic energy to nuclear science : a history of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission". [Sydney] : Macquarie University Physics Department, 2003. http://www.ansto.gov.au/libsite/Fulltext/Binnie_atomic-energy.pdf.
G, Hewlett Richard, Duncan Francis 1922-, Holl Jack M e Anderson Oscar E, a cura di. A history of the United States Atomic Energy Commission. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989.
Sylves, Richard Terry. The nuclear oracles: A political history of the General Advisory Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission, 1947-1977. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1987.
Capitoli di libri sul tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History":
1
Conant, James K., e Peter J. Balint. "The Environmental Protection Agency: 1970–2010". In The Life Cycles of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency. Oxford University Press, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190203702.003.0008.
The official birthdate of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is December 2, 1970. On that day the Senate confirmed William Ruckelshaus, President Nixon’s nominee to be the administrator of the new agency, and the “EPA opened for business in a tiny suite of offices at 20th and L Streets in Northwest Washington, DC.” The new agency took over programs and offices related to environmental protection previously operating in the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Food and Drug Administration, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Federal Radiation Council. In this chapter, we examine and attempt to explain what happened to this major regulatory agency over the forty-year period from its birth in 1970 to 2010. In doing so, we test hypotheses that follow from the four categories of theoretical agency life cycle models introduced in Chapter 3. These models differ in their predictions for the trajectories of federal agencies. The biological model predicts that agencies will grow rapidly during their early life before reaching a relatively stable maturity. Over subsequent decades agencies may carry on indefinitely with declining vigor, or be absorbed into other agencies, or die, although scholars debate both the process and probability of agency mortality. The partisan political model predicts a more turbulent life history for agencies in which changing party control of Congress and the White House will buffet government organizations more or less routinely. According to this model, federal agencies will often be caught in the middle of partisan ideological battles over the importance and value of the social functions they were created to address. The incremental model suggests that the best predictor of how agencies will fare in the near future is how they have fared in the recent past. That is, agencies tend to be insulated from external political and economic fluctuations and therefore generally experience relatively minor changes over time to their budgets and operations. The issue-attention model predicts that agencies’ fortunes are tied to the vagaries of current events.
Atti di convegni sul tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History":
1
Orlando, Dominick, Chad Glenn, Anna Bradford e Claudia Craig. "Update on the Status of the West Valley Demonstration Project". In ASME 2003 9th International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation. ASMEDC, 2003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/icem2003-4670.
From 1966 to1972, under an Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) license, Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) reprocessed 640 metric tons of spent fuel at its West Valley, New York, facility, the only commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant in the U.S. The facility shut down in 1972, for modifications to increase its seismic stability and to expand its capacity. In 1976, without restarting the operation, NFS withdrew from the reprocessing business and returned control of the facilities to the site owner, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). The reprocessing activities resulted in about 2.3 million liters (600,000 gallons) of liquid high-level waste (HLW) stored below ground in tanks, other radioactive wastes, and residual radioactive contamination. The West Valley site was licensed by AEC, and then the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), until 1981, when the license was suspended to execute the 1980 West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Act. The WVDP Act outlines the responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), NRC, and NYSERDA at the site, including the NRC’s responsibility to develop decommissioning criteria for the site. The Commission published the final policy statement on decommissioning criteria for the WVDP at the West Valley site after considering comments from interested stakeholders. In that regard, the Commission prescribed the License Termination Rule (LTR) criteria for the WVDP at the West Valley site, reflecting the fact that the applicable decommissioning goal for the entire NRC-licensed site is compliance with the requirements of the LTR. This paper will describe the history of the site, provide an update of the status of the decommissioning of the site and an overview of the technical and policy issues facing Federal and State regulators and other stakeholders as they strive to complete the remediation of the site.
2
Le Goaller, C., C. Doutreluingne, M. A. Berton e O. Doucet. "Final Cleanup of Buildings Within in Legacy French Research Facilities: Strategy, Tools and Lessons Learned". In The 11th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management. ASMEDC, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/icem2007-7132.
This paper describes the methodology followed by the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) to decommission the buildings of former research facilities for demolition or possible reuse. It is a well known fact that the French nuclear safety authority has decided not to define any general release level for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, thus effectively prohibiting radiological measurement-driven decommissioning. The decommissioning procedure therefore requires an intensive in-depth examination of each nuclear plant. This requires a good knowledge of the past history of the plant, and should be initiated as early as possible. The paper first describes the regulatory framework recently unveiled by the French Safety Authority, then, reviews its application to ongoing decommissioning projects. The cornerstone of the strategy is the definition of waste zoning in the buildings to segregate areas producing conventional waste from those generating nuclear waste. After dismantling, suitable measurements are carried out to confirm the conventional state of the remaining walls. This requires low-level measurement methods providing a suitable detection limit within an acceptable measuring time. Although this generally involves particle counting and in-situ low level gamma spectrometry, the paper focuses on γ spectrometry. Finally, the lessons learned from ongoing projects are discussed.
3
Levy, Salomon. "Obstacles to Overcome by Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)". In ASME 2011 Small Modular Reactors Symposium. ASMEDC, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/smr2011-6553.
The development of and support for small modular nuclear power plants (NPPs) is gaining strong momentum in USA. The reasons are that they could require reduced financing and shortened construction schedule. Also, they could address the reduced size need for electricity in some USA locations and, in particular, in developing foreign countries. However, the prevailing enthusiasm needs to be moderated until several potential obstacles are overcome. There are three principal USA obstacles: (1) the successful licensing and certification of the SMRs by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to confirm their safety; (2) SMRs ability to demonstrate that they can compete financially against less costly modular natural gas power plants or the limited purchase of electricity from new large light water reactors (LWRs); and (3) the need to work into the prevailing fuel cycle while not deteriorating spent fuel disposal or increasing proliferation. Clearly, Babcock & Wilcox’s and Nu Scale Power’s SMRs have the earliest chance for success because they would rely upon the present LWR regulatory and fuel cycle experience. Their main obstacle will be demonstrated costs from prototype plants and the willingness to accept fixed turnkey contracts for additional units. The more visionary SMRs such as GE-Hitachi PRISM or the Hyperion Power Generation smaller liquid metal closed fuel cycle reactors will have to overcome more difficult and lengthy regulatory assessments. Also, a complete fuel cycle infrastructure will need to be developed. Penetration of developing foreign countries will be the most difficult because it will demand the development and establishment of a nuclear safety infrastructure in those countries. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA NG-G-31) has detailed the numerous actions and large time schedule and efforts to achieve an adequate safety culture. Also, several export licenses and monetary loans will be required. Furthermore, it will be necessary to overcome the lack of insurance for severe accidents and the anticipated USA refusal to accept domestic disposal of foreign High Level Waste (HLW). This means that government owned suppliers such as Russia have definite advantages over the USA private suppliers because of their willingness to provide loans and handling HLW. This paper first summarizes the power history growth of USA reactors and the recent momentum developed for USA SMRs; it is followed by available brief descriptions of USA LWR SMRs and some of their potential obstacles; more advanced USA SMRs designs and their potential difficulties come next; foreign applications are covered last and they are followed by a Conclusions section.
Rapporti di organizzazioni sul tema "Australian Atomic Energy Commission History":
1
Hewlett, R. G., e J. M. Holl. A history of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, 1952-1960: Volume 3. Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), gennaio 1987. http://dx.doi.org/10.2172/6150636.
